linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com>
To: Torsten Duwe <duwe@lst.de>
Cc: Miroslav Benes <mbenes@suse.cz>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	live-patching@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ppc64le save_stack_trace_tsk_reliable (Was: HAVE_RELIABLE_STACKTRACE)
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2018 08:43:33 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180309084333.23287074@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180227160924.GA19111@lst.de>

On Tue, 27 Feb 2018 17:09:24 +0100
Torsten Duwe <duwe@lst.de> wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 01:12:37PM +0100, Miroslav Benes wrote:
> > 
> > I think that this is not enough. You need to also implement 
> > save_stack_trace_tsk_reliable() for powerpc defined as __weak in 
> > kernel/stacktrace.c.  
> 
> So here is my initial proposal. I'd really like to get the successful
> exit stricter, i.e. hit the initial stack value exactly instead of just
> a window. Also, the check for kernel code looks clumsy IMHO. IOW:
> Comments more than welcome!
> 
> Most of it is Copy&Waste, nonetheless:

:)

> 
> Signed-off-by: Torsten Duwe <duwe@suse.de>
> 
> 
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/stacktrace.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/stacktrace.c
> index d534ed901538..e08af49e71d0 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/stacktrace.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/stacktrace.c
> @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@
>  #include <linux/export.h>
>  #include <linux/sched.h>
>  #include <linux/sched/debug.h>
> +#include <linux/sched/task_stack.h>
>  #include <linux/stacktrace.h>
>  #include <asm/ptrace.h>
>  #include <asm/processor.h>
> @@ -76,3 +77,58 @@ save_stack_trace_regs(struct pt_regs *regs, struct stack_trace *trace)
>  	save_context_stack(trace, regs->gpr[1], current, 0);
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(save_stack_trace_regs);
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_RELIABLE_STACKTRACE
> +int
> +save_stack_trace_tsk_reliable(struct task_struct *tsk,
> +                              struct stack_trace *trace)

Just double checking this is called under the task_rq_lock, so its safe
to call task_stack_page() as opposed to try_get_task_stack()

> +{
> +	unsigned long sp;
> +	unsigned long stack_page = (unsigned long)task_stack_page(tsk);
> +	/* the last frame (unwinding first) may not yet have saved its LR onto the stack. */
> +	int firstframe = 1;
> +
> +	if (tsk == current)
> +		sp = current_stack_pointer();
> +	else
> +		sp = tsk->thread.ksp;
> +
> +	if (sp < stack_page + sizeof(struct thread_struct)
> +	    || sp > stack_page + THREAD_SIZE - STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD)
> +		return 1;

Some of this is already present in validate_sp(), it also validates
irq stacks, should we just reuse that?

> +	
> +	for (;;) {
> +		unsigned long *stack = (unsigned long *) sp;
> +		unsigned long newsp, ip;
> +
> +		newsp = stack[0];
> +		/* Stack grows downwards; unwinder may only go up */
> +		if (newsp <= sp)
> +			return 1;
> +
> +		if (newsp >= stack_page + THREAD_SIZE)
> +			return 1; /* invalid backlink, too far up! */
> +
> +		/* Examine the saved LR: it must point into kernel code. */
> +		ip = stack[STACK_FRAME_LR_SAVE];
> +		if ( (ip & 0xEFFF000000000000) != CONFIG_KERNEL_START
> +		     && !firstframe)
> +			return 1;
> +		firstframe = 0;
> +
> +		if (!trace->skip)
> +			trace->entries[trace->nr_entries++] = ip;
> +		else
> +			trace->skip--;
> +
> +		if (newsp > stack_page + THREAD_SIZE - STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD)
> +			break; /* hit the window for last frame */
> +
> +		if (trace->nr_entries >= trace->max_entries)
> +			return -E2BIG;
> +
> +		sp = newsp;
> +	}
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +#endif /* CONFIG_HAVE_RELIABLE_STACKTRACE */
> 

Looks good to me otherwise.

Acked-by: Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com>

  reply	other threads:[~2018-03-08 21:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-10-04 15:25 [PATCH v2] kernel/module_64.c: Add REL24 relocation support of livepatch symbols Kamalesh Babulal
2017-10-05  6:56 ` Naveen N . Rao
2017-10-05 12:43 ` Torsten Duwe
2017-10-06  5:43   ` Kamalesh Babulal
2017-10-11  9:44     ` Kamalesh Babulal
2017-10-06  5:57   ` Kamalesh Babulal
2017-10-17 14:47     ` Torsten Duwe
2017-10-18  6:17       ` Kamalesh Babulal
2017-10-20 12:07         ` Torsten Duwe
2017-10-21  0:59           ` Balbir Singh
2017-10-23  8:19             ` Kamalesh Babulal
2017-12-12 11:39               ` [PATCH] On ppc64le we HAVE_RELIABLE_STACKTRACE Torsten Duwe
2017-12-12 12:12                 ` Miroslav Benes
2017-12-12 13:02                   ` Torsten Duwe
2018-02-27 16:09                   ` [PATCH 2/2] ppc64le save_stack_trace_tsk_reliable (Was: HAVE_RELIABLE_STACKTRACE) Torsten Duwe
2018-03-08 21:43                     ` Balbir Singh [this message]
2018-03-09 15:54                       ` Torsten Duwe
2017-12-12 14:05                 ` [PATCH] On ppc64le we HAVE_RELIABLE_STACKTRACE Josh Poimboeuf
2017-12-15  9:40                   ` Nicholas Piggin
2017-12-18  2:58                     ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-12-18  3:39                       ` Balbir Singh
2017-12-18  4:01                         ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-12-18  5:33                       ` Nicholas Piggin
2017-12-18 18:56                         ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-12-19  2:46                           ` Nicholas Piggin
2017-12-19 11:28                           ` Torsten Duwe
2017-12-19 21:46                             ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-12-21 12:10                               ` Michael Ellerman
2017-12-23  4:00                                 ` Josh Poimboeuf

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20180309084333.23287074@gmail.com \
    --to=bsingharora@gmail.com \
    --cc=duwe@lst.de \
    --cc=jkosina@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=live-patching@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mbenes@suse.cz \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).